John 10:34-35, With Psalm 82:6
Those who embrace the "little gods" doctrine almost universally cite these verses, wrested from their contexts. In Mark 12:28, Christ was asked the question, "Of all the commandments, which is the most important?" To which Jesus replied, "Here, O Israel, the Lord our God, the Lord is One." And yet, Jesus claimed deity, union with the Godhead, on numerous occasions. Nevertheless, the faith teachers appeal to Christ's remark in John 12:48-50: "Is is not written in your Law, 'I have said you are gods'?. . . and the Scripture cannot be broken" (John 10:34-35).
In the beginning of this story in John 10, Jesus states, "I and the Father are one" (v. 30). Furious, the Jews picked up stones. Jesus asked them, "For which of these [good works] do you stone me?" To which the Jews responded, "We are not stoning you for any of these . . . but for blasphemy, because you, a mere man, claim to be God" (v. 32-33). His citation of the eighty-second Psalm perplexed them. "Is is not written in your law, 'I have said you are gods'?. . . and the Scripture cannot be broken" -- why on earth did He quote that one? they wondered. Was Christ, in fact, teaching that man was a god? And if so, how can this be reconciled with the extreme monotheism (one-God-ism) of Judaism, which He both believed and taught as a rabbi.
There can be no doubt from the history and theology of the Old Testament that the judges of Israel and rulers of the people were representatives, or mouthpieces, for God. Such individuals were accorded great respect and assumed in the eyes of the people the outward appearance of "mighty ones" (in Hebrew, Elohim, "gods").
This should not come as a surprise to us when we remember Exodus 7:1, where God, speaking to Moses, says, "I have made thee a god to Pharaoh" (KJV). Now, there can be no doubt that Moses was no more than a mortal man -- in no sense divine, by nature or in essence. Nevertheless, since Pharaoh was a pagan and God was addressing him in that context, He was, in effect, saying, "When I finish with Pharaoh, through the power that will be revealed in you, Moses, My representative, he (Pharaoh) will think you are a god." The plagues of Egypt were evidence to Pharaoh and to the occultic priests who surrounded him that this was indeed the "finger of God" (Exodus 8:19).
Moses did not lay claim to being a deity. Instead, he manifested the power of deity as a gift from the only Deity -- God the Father, Son, and the Holy Ghost. Similarly, the judges of Israel fulfilled the same role and so appeared to be gods. But in reality, they were sinful men who abused their office, and as a result God mocked them, saying, "I have said, Ye are gods. . . . Ye shall die like men" (Psalm 82:6-7). Here were men who were supposed to emulate God's own character but who had become corrupt rulers. They were supposed to be defenders of "the poor and fatherless . . . the afflicted and needy" (v3, KJV), but instead they were proud men, who -- though they looked like gods in the eyes of the people -- would nevertheless demonstrate their frail mortality in the judgment of death.
In Genesis 3:5, we can clearly see the teaching that man is a "god" or can become "like God" in relation to the divine essence originates not with God, but with Satan, who brought about the fall of man by deceiving Eve and then Adam into believing they would be like "gods."
Bible scholars have pointed out that Christ's statement, then, in John 10, is in the form of irony. God, they say, was stating something that would be recognized by anyone as an absurdity. Paul did the same with the Corinthians, mockingly referring to them as "kings," when both he and they knew they had not become kings at all. Instead, they were abusing their spiritual gifts. Similarly, in John 10, Jesus mocked the people as if to say, "You all think you're gods yourselves. What's one more god among you?" Irony is used to provoke us, not to inform us. It is not a basis for building a theology.
It is also pertinent to an understanding of John 10 that we remember that Satan is called "the ruler of this world" by no less an authority than the Lord Jesus Christ (John 14:30, NASB). And Paul reinforces this by calling him "the god of this age" (II Corinthians 4:4). We can make a "god" out of anything -- money, power, status, position, sex, patriotism, family, or, as in Lucifer's case, an angel. We can be our own "god." But to call something deity or to worship it or treat it as divine is quite another thing than its being by nature and in essence deity.
The Bible insists that there is but one Creator: "Besides Me there is no god" (Isaiah 45:5, NASB). We need only compare Deuteromony 32:21, where God charged the Israelites with provoking Him to anger by the worship of "what is not God" (NASB), with Galations 4:8, where Paul reminds the church that they served pagan deities before their conversion to Christ and "were slaves to those which by nature are no gods" (v. 8, NASB; italics added).
There is, therefore, only one God by nature, one God who is omnipotent, omniscient, omnipresent, one God who possess characteristics and attributes that may be imitated but never duplicated in finite creations. When it is said, then, that man is or can be a "god," we must remember that Christ is stating (John 10, with Psalm 82) that only He, the incarnate Word, has the right to the title of deity among men, since He alone is designated "the only begotten God" (John 1:18, Greek text). What we worship then may become "a god" to us, but it is not deity, as it is written, "'You are my witnesses,' declares the Lord, 'and my servant who I have chosen, so that you may know and believe Me and understand that I am He. Before Me no god was formed, nor will there be one after Me.'" (Isaiah 43:10).
If this were not enough, such passages as Isaiah 44:6, 45:22, and Deuteronomy 6:4 would close the issue forever.
For more information on Victory Churches and the Faith Movement, go to the Reference Library. Click on any book title to get a brief overview of the book. All books on the list are available through www.amazon.com.
Showing posts with label theology. Show all posts
Showing posts with label theology. Show all posts
Wednesday, June 12, 2013
Saturday, April 20, 2013
Scripture Twisting -- Conclusion
The portrait of today's Word/Faith preaching is not encouraging. In general, we have little choice but to recommend that much, if not most, of Word/Faith preaching return to the drawing board to develop a hermeneutics that honours the Word of God. The situation is extremely serious.
Word/Faith preachers at time emphasize the necessity "to stay with the Word," "to stay with all of the Word," and "to stay with the Word only." That advice is excellent but the practice usually lags far behind the theory.
To preach the prosperity gospel is not to "stay with the Word." It has correctly been called "a modern heresy. . . to say that those who have genuine faith will unfailingly experience health, wealth, success and freedom from trouble." It is simply unbiblical to advocate that God is the author of health and wealth, Satan the source of sickness and poverty, and that the believer has the right to demand health and wealth. It is biblically unconscionable to insist that upon paying the tithes (Malachi 3:10), or any kind of "seed" money (II Corinthians 9:6-10), the Christian may decree physical vigor, financial success, a comfortable home, a new car, or even the salvation of a loved one as part of his reign over anything satanic and evil. The "name it and claim it" position cannot be reconciled with biblical truths such as found in Genesis 15:13; 50:20; Job 1 and 2; Psalms 119:67, 71, 75; Amos 3:6; John 15:18-20; 16:2; Romans 8:18-23; Hebrews 11:35-38; 12:4-11; Revelation 2:8-11, and so on.
Further, to make success and the "name it, claim it" message, the main focus of one's ministry is not to "stay with all of the Word." At worst it is heresy and at best majoring in minors. The whole counsel of God vanishes from view (Acts 20:27), and so does the truly "full Gospel" of Christ (Romans 15:29). Modern Word/Faith preaching is advised to return to the solid themes that in the past brought on the genuine and mighty revivals, such as total depravity, original sin, sovereign grace, the substitutionary atonement, regeneration, repentance, saving faith, justification, holiness, the judgment, and the two-fold eternal state.
Finally, the all-to-frequent references to private communications from God or the Spirit do not square with the emphasis "to stay with the Word only." Since the canon is closed, there is every reason to hold that such communications have ceased. New and authoritative revelation is a thing of the past. Reliance upon extra-biblical revelation, therefore, brings the sufficiency of Scripture into serious question.
The only standard of faith and practice is, indeed, the Word, all of the Word, and the Word only. But a formal commitment to this is insufficient. It takes a properly constructed and detailed systematic and biblical theology to flesh this out and to ensure substantive adherence to it. Regrettably such theology is not in evidence.
Under the present circumstances no respite can be expected from the interpretive process either.
The possibility thinker makes self-esteem the material principle of the interpretation of Scripture and therefore the ultimate determinant of its meaning and of the theology built upon it. The net effect is "another gospel." The contention that Jesus came into the world to save from the shame of a low self-image and to instill self-esteem hardly warrants any other conclusion.
The positive confessionist has a similar problem. For him health and wealth is the material principle of the interpretation of Scripture. The upshot is that he believes that every Scripture passage and every Scripture doctrine affirms that the believer may anticipate, indeed, decree, success. This is "another gospel" as well.
On balance, it is appropriate to recommend that much, if not all, of Word/Faith preaching take a second look at its hermeneutics so as to ensure that the voice of God, the full voice of God and only the voice of God comes through to the audience. Otherwise, the listener should be advised frequently to make his first look his last.
Word/Faith preachers at time emphasize the necessity "to stay with the Word," "to stay with all of the Word," and "to stay with the Word only." That advice is excellent but the practice usually lags far behind the theory.
To preach the prosperity gospel is not to "stay with the Word." It has correctly been called "a modern heresy. . . to say that those who have genuine faith will unfailingly experience health, wealth, success and freedom from trouble." It is simply unbiblical to advocate that God is the author of health and wealth, Satan the source of sickness and poverty, and that the believer has the right to demand health and wealth. It is biblically unconscionable to insist that upon paying the tithes (Malachi 3:10), or any kind of "seed" money (II Corinthians 9:6-10), the Christian may decree physical vigor, financial success, a comfortable home, a new car, or even the salvation of a loved one as part of his reign over anything satanic and evil. The "name it and claim it" position cannot be reconciled with biblical truths such as found in Genesis 15:13; 50:20; Job 1 and 2; Psalms 119:67, 71, 75; Amos 3:6; John 15:18-20; 16:2; Romans 8:18-23; Hebrews 11:35-38; 12:4-11; Revelation 2:8-11, and so on.
Further, to make success and the "name it, claim it" message, the main focus of one's ministry is not to "stay with all of the Word." At worst it is heresy and at best majoring in minors. The whole counsel of God vanishes from view (Acts 20:27), and so does the truly "full Gospel" of Christ (Romans 15:29). Modern Word/Faith preaching is advised to return to the solid themes that in the past brought on the genuine and mighty revivals, such as total depravity, original sin, sovereign grace, the substitutionary atonement, regeneration, repentance, saving faith, justification, holiness, the judgment, and the two-fold eternal state.
Finally, the all-to-frequent references to private communications from God or the Spirit do not square with the emphasis "to stay with the Word only." Since the canon is closed, there is every reason to hold that such communications have ceased. New and authoritative revelation is a thing of the past. Reliance upon extra-biblical revelation, therefore, brings the sufficiency of Scripture into serious question.
The only standard of faith and practice is, indeed, the Word, all of the Word, and the Word only. But a formal commitment to this is insufficient. It takes a properly constructed and detailed systematic and biblical theology to flesh this out and to ensure substantive adherence to it. Regrettably such theology is not in evidence.
Under the present circumstances no respite can be expected from the interpretive process either.
The possibility thinker makes self-esteem the material principle of the interpretation of Scripture and therefore the ultimate determinant of its meaning and of the theology built upon it. The net effect is "another gospel." The contention that Jesus came into the world to save from the shame of a low self-image and to instill self-esteem hardly warrants any other conclusion.
The positive confessionist has a similar problem. For him health and wealth is the material principle of the interpretation of Scripture. The upshot is that he believes that every Scripture passage and every Scripture doctrine affirms that the believer may anticipate, indeed, decree, success. This is "another gospel" as well.
On balance, it is appropriate to recommend that much, if not all, of Word/Faith preaching take a second look at its hermeneutics so as to ensure that the voice of God, the full voice of God and only the voice of God comes through to the audience. Otherwise, the listener should be advised frequently to make his first look his last.
- Henry Krabbendam
For more information on Victory Churches and the Faith Movement, go to the Reference Library. Click on any book title to get a brief overview of the book. All books on the list are available through www.amazon.com.
Saturday, January 5, 2013
Private Interpretation
An essential element of the Protestant Reformation was the principle of private interpretation of the Bible. That is not to say that the view was never articulated before Martin Luther, but the Reformation did emphasize the position. The concept of private interpretation is subject to much confusion. It suggests to some a license for subjective and relativistic interpretations: "What is God telling me in this passage?" or, "Well, there are a number of ways to read the text." How often have we heard the phrase "that's your interpretation," with the unspoken assumption that your interpretation and my interpretation can be equally valid -- even though they contradict each other. Here the Bible becomes a wax nose, capable of being formed and twisted to suit anyone's prejudice.
That is hardly the intention of the historic doctrine of private interpretation. Against the relativistic view of subjective interpretation stands the classical principle of the objective truth of Scripture. The Scriptures do not contradict themselves. When we disagree, your view may not be correct; mine may not be -- both can be wrong, but both cannot be right at the same time in the same place. There may be thousands of applications of a given text, but there is only one correct meaning.
The idea of private interpretation arose as a protest against limiting the translation of the Bible into the vernacular (i.e., the common language of the people). Translating the Bible into French, German and English, for example, was motivated largely by the desire of the Reformers to allow the laity to read the Bible for themselves. But the right of private interpretation always carries with it the responsibility of interpreting the Bible accurately. God grants no one the "right" to distort the meaning of Scripture. "Private interpretation" does not mean that the individual Christian is free to find in Scripture something that is not there. That is why we look to the interpretations of those who have gone before us. Although tradition does not rule out interpretation it does guide it. If, upon reading a particular passage, you have come up with an interpretation that has escaped the notice of every other Christian for two thousand years, or that has been championed by universally recognized heretics, chances are pretty good that you had better abandon your interpretation. Private interpretation is not only a right; it is a grave responsibility.
Our distortions or misinterpretations of Scripture are not caused so much by the lack of biblical clarity as by our own weaknesses in handling the text. Here private interpretations touches another cardinal maxim of Protestant theology: the perspicuity of Scripture.
For more information on Victory Churches and the Faith Movement, go to the Reference Library. Click on any book title to get a brief overview of the book. All books on the list are available through www.amazon.com.
That is hardly the intention of the historic doctrine of private interpretation. Against the relativistic view of subjective interpretation stands the classical principle of the objective truth of Scripture. The Scriptures do not contradict themselves. When we disagree, your view may not be correct; mine may not be -- both can be wrong, but both cannot be right at the same time in the same place. There may be thousands of applications of a given text, but there is only one correct meaning.
The idea of private interpretation arose as a protest against limiting the translation of the Bible into the vernacular (i.e., the common language of the people). Translating the Bible into French, German and English, for example, was motivated largely by the desire of the Reformers to allow the laity to read the Bible for themselves. But the right of private interpretation always carries with it the responsibility of interpreting the Bible accurately. God grants no one the "right" to distort the meaning of Scripture. "Private interpretation" does not mean that the individual Christian is free to find in Scripture something that is not there. That is why we look to the interpretations of those who have gone before us. Although tradition does not rule out interpretation it does guide it. If, upon reading a particular passage, you have come up with an interpretation that has escaped the notice of every other Christian for two thousand years, or that has been championed by universally recognized heretics, chances are pretty good that you had better abandon your interpretation. Private interpretation is not only a right; it is a grave responsibility.
Our distortions or misinterpretations of Scripture are not caused so much by the lack of biblical clarity as by our own weaknesses in handling the text. Here private interpretations touches another cardinal maxim of Protestant theology: the perspicuity of Scripture.
For more information on Victory Churches and the Faith Movement, go to the Reference Library. Click on any book title to get a brief overview of the book. All books on the list are available through www.amazon.com.
Tuesday, April 22, 2008
The Health and Wealth Gospel Is Going Down!
In a very short space of time the "Health and Wealth" gospel will be history. Any minister still teaching it will be called to account for this teaching by his congregation and if he doesn't stop teaching it, he will be asked to leave.
God has moved very decisively against the "Health and Wealth" gospel in recent months. He has brought down the main source of this "rot and swill" which has been infecting Christianity for some time. Oral Roberts University is now bankrupt and out of business. Its President and CEO, Richard Roberts, is under investigation by a U.S. Senate Committee for misappropriation of funds. What this means is that no more false teachers will be produced out of there to propagate this cancer throughout the Christian community. Satan has been doing some of his best work from inside the church.
Also being investigated by the Senate Committee are Kenneth Copeland, Creflo Dollar, Joyce Meyers, and Benny Hinn.
"Surprise, Surprise, Surprise" Pay Attention True Christians! What is the message here? You need to stop supporting anyone who teaches the "Health and Wealth" gospel. Stop attending their meetings. Stop sending them money. As long as you do, they'll be laughing all the way to the bank.
These people are very dangerous. Using the gospel as a smokescreen, they have the ability to hide their real reason for teaching the "Health and Wealth" gospel. That reason is to gain personal wealth from their followers. They are told that if they give to the church they will receive a one hundredfold return. This is nothing more than a "get rich quick" scheme for those in leadership positions. Has anyone at BVC received their hundredfold yet? I'd bet a lot of money that they haven't.
I'd also bet that my son, Glenn, has not yet been cured of his diabetes either. Don't let them tell you to go off your insulin and trust God for a miracle. You could end up dead just like a friend of mine who fell for the Pentecostal "mumbo-jumbo" that the church was telling them. You don't need doctors or medical treatment.. you just have to have enough faith. Her miracle never came and she is dead--at age 43. This is where their teachings on healings lead. Many deaths have been reported all over the world due to this foolish man-made theology. IT JUST ISN'T TRUE!
Won't Judgment Day be interesting to watch as these people try to explain the intentional misleading of millions for personal gain to the Lord of Lords and King of Kings. What could they possibly say to explain themselves? It will be a rather humbling experience, don't you think?
God has moved very decisively against the "Health and Wealth" gospel in recent months. He has brought down the main source of this "rot and swill" which has been infecting Christianity for some time. Oral Roberts University is now bankrupt and out of business. Its President and CEO, Richard Roberts, is under investigation by a U.S. Senate Committee for misappropriation of funds. What this means is that no more false teachers will be produced out of there to propagate this cancer throughout the Christian community. Satan has been doing some of his best work from inside the church.
Also being investigated by the Senate Committee are Kenneth Copeland, Creflo Dollar, Joyce Meyers, and Benny Hinn.
"Surprise, Surprise, Surprise" Pay Attention True Christians! What is the message here? You need to stop supporting anyone who teaches the "Health and Wealth" gospel. Stop attending their meetings. Stop sending them money. As long as you do, they'll be laughing all the way to the bank.
These people are very dangerous. Using the gospel as a smokescreen, they have the ability to hide their real reason for teaching the "Health and Wealth" gospel. That reason is to gain personal wealth from their followers. They are told that if they give to the church they will receive a one hundredfold return. This is nothing more than a "get rich quick" scheme for those in leadership positions. Has anyone at BVC received their hundredfold yet? I'd bet a lot of money that they haven't.
I'd also bet that my son, Glenn, has not yet been cured of his diabetes either. Don't let them tell you to go off your insulin and trust God for a miracle. You could end up dead just like a friend of mine who fell for the Pentecostal "mumbo-jumbo" that the church was telling them. You don't need doctors or medical treatment.. you just have to have enough faith. Her miracle never came and she is dead--at age 43. This is where their teachings on healings lead. Many deaths have been reported all over the world due to this foolish man-made theology. IT JUST ISN'T TRUE!
Won't Judgment Day be interesting to watch as these people try to explain the intentional misleading of millions for personal gain to the Lord of Lords and King of Kings. What could they possibly say to explain themselves? It will be a rather humbling experience, don't you think?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)